MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285464597 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14662353

AIDS in action: a new movement led by Canadians living with HIV & its implications on critical anti-oppressive social work practice

2021· preprint· en· W4285464597 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christian Hui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Action (physics)SociologyPublic relationsSocial workQualitative researchPerspective (graphical)Collective actionWork (physics)Social movementAction researchPolitical scienceGender studiesMedicineSocial sciencePedagogyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conducted by an HIV+ activist-researcher, the study reported upon in this MRP aimed to 1) explore the challenges and opportunities faced by a new movement led by Canadians living with HIV to place the affected community of people living with HIV/AIDS (PHAs) back to the forefront of the national HIV response; and 2) establish the key factors and conditions that may help strengthen this community-led effort. The qualitative study utilized the Positive People Centred Perspective as theoretical framework comprised of interviews with key Canadian HIV+ activists on their reflections of the recent efforts by the new Canadian Positive People Network (CPPN) to create a collective voice for Canadian PHAs and their views of the essential elements that are necessary for the network and movement to thrive. Results of the research will help strengthen the development of CPPN and inform critical, anti-oppressive social work practice and scholarship.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0560.028
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Work Education and Practice→French-language works237,207→